Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Schichau-class torpedo boat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article promoted by Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 10:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

Schichau-class torpedo boat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This was a class of dinky little torpedo boats built for the Austro-Hungarian Navy before WWI. They were getting a bit old by the time the war broke out, so were utilised in second-line roles, and therefore didn't see much action, although that is true of most of the Austro-Hungarian Navy in WWI. After the war, a few ended up with the Navy of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (after 1929, Yugoslavia), which is why I'm interested in them. This article is part of a Good Topic I'm slowly moving towards Featured. I believe it is comprehensive. Have at it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

[edit]
  • In the infobox "88–90 t (87–89 long tons) (full load)" Link tonnes, long tons and full load here.
    done the first bit, but full load is just another link to the displacement (ship) page. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the infobox "1,000 ihp (750 kW)" Link kW.
  • In the infobox "1,200 nmi (2,200 km; 1,400 mi) at 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph)" Link both nmi and knots.
    linked knots for speed, but otherwise done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the infobox "2 × 356 mm (14.0 in) torpedo tubes" Round the nought here.
  • a standard displacement of 88–90 tonnes (87–89 long tons) at full load Link both tonnes, long tons and full load here.
  • equipped with two 356 mm (14.0 in) torpedo tubes Round the nought here.
  • the 13th Torpedo Boat Group of the 7th Torpedo Craft Division at Pola Are there articles for both units?
  • the 20th Torpedo Boat Group of the 10th Torpedo Craft Division at Sebenico Same as above.
    I doubt very much any of them would be notable, as they would lack significant coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Captured during the World War II Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941 Sea blue here.
  • with the Italians then the Germans You mean than?
    No, then. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • After all boats of the class were Add "the" before boats.
    Not sure that is needed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

  • Please translate Bilzer's book. Also there should be a |language=German in the cite book.
  • Friedman's book has a little typo in its title. It should be "Naval Weapons of World War One". Also you could add an URL to the preview?
  • A ":W.I." should be add in Vego's book. Also not sure or it is allowed to use -isation in a -ization proper noun like the International Naval Research Organisation?
    Not sure what you mean by :W.I."? Changed to US spelling. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    World Cat told me that the original title of the book is "Warship international : W.I.". So I reckon we should add the W.I. in its title. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:01, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The full title of the journal is Warship International, not Warship International : W.I. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure or the source of Niehorster is reliable or not. Could you please explain to me who he/she is/was?
    Niehorster has a PhD in history and is an expert on orders of battle, having had several books published on the subject by Military Press. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Sources are reliable and high-quality.

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CPA-5, all done except where noted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Response above. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

This'll be somewhat of a backwards image review, with some suggested images:

Plenty to choose from! Parsecboy (talk) 17:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nate, I should have done this myself. Picked a side-on view and added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Harrias

[edit]

On a first read through, very good, just some nitpicks I think.

That's all from me. Good work. Harrias talk 08:19, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the review, Harrias! Hopefully I have addressed your comments? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nice article, no qualms supporting. Harrias talk 10:37, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Sturmvogel_66

[edit]

Support Comments by Cinderella167

[edit]

Hi, just a few observations that are relatively minor.

  • In the lead: A total of 22 boats were built by three shipbuilding companies; nine by Seearsenal Pola, six by Stabilimento Tecnico Triestino, and the remaining seven boats were built by Schichau-Werke. It is perhaps a colon, being the start of a list and the second "boats were built" is redundant?
    This has now been removed from the lead. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would probably use c. 1943 instead of the question mark in the infobox.
    Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • A radius of action implies to me a two-way trip as cited for combat aircraft as opposed to "range", being a one-way trip (per link also). The infobox reports a range (endurance) equal to the radius of action and would appear to be incorrect.
    This is a good point. The source used endurance, which I think equates to range, so changed to match that. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The footnote explaining L/23 is a little clunky to me. Suggest: L/23 denotes the barrel's length as multiples of the gun's calibre – i.e the length is 23 times the diameter of the bore. It explains the designation but avoids getting tied down in semantics.
    I agree it is a bit clunky, but calibre can mean bore or length. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Then suggest: L/23 denotes the barrel's length as 23 times the diameter of the bore. It explains the designation but avoids getting tied down in semantics.
    Works for me. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:10, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • D1 and D3–D4 suggest reword D1, D3 and D4.
    Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 00:06, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look, Cinderella157! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments support by Pendright

[edit]

Lede:

  • Ten of the class were converted to minesweepers between 1911 and 1913, and apart from one that was discarded in 1911, all boats saw active service as part of local defence forces for Adriatic naval bases during World War I, with one being lost in the early days of the war.
  • This sentence is about 51 words in length, long by most style guides.
  • Ten of the class "were" converted: Does a collective noun take a plural in Aus/Eng?
  • Should it not be "in" to minesweepers?
  • Consider placing the definite article "the" between for and Adriatic.
  • ... and four were allocated to the navy of the newly created Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later Yugoslavia).
In this context, should navy be upper case?
Not sure about that, if it was Navy of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, but I don't think so in this combination. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • After capture during the April 1941 invasion of Yugoslavia the remaining boat saw service with the Italians then the Germans during World War II.
  • Consdier a comma between Yugoslavia and the
  • Consider the word "and" berween Italians and then.

Design and construction:

  • Design and construction
  • Retitling to Construction and design would follow the order of the text.
  • Isn't it customary to present the general characteristics of a ship before that of its machinery?
  • ...sufficient coal to give them a radius ...
Is "radious" the right word here?
No, I think range is better. The source uses the term "endurance", which I think is closer to range. Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time they were built, boats of this class were initially given names, but they were redesignated with numbers ...
This is not a good fit here?
Moved. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Service history:

  • All of the remaining torpedo boats were converted to minesweepers
Consider in to rather than to
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. 28 was discarded in 1911, being transferred to the Austro-Hungarian Army and serving as Tender 28.
"discarded" and "transferred", unclear?
See if it is better now? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Finished - Pendright (talk) 00:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the review, Pendright! See what you think of my changes. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67: All good, supporting! Pendright (talk) 23:27, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.